“The South Perth foreshore is 62 hectares – there are so many other areas where planting trees which would grow to such heights would not cause such discourse,” Coveney said.
Loading
“This motion finds a middle ground in protecting significant views, promoting wildlife and promoting urban greening, whilst giving council a pathway to deal with these sorts of issues moving forward by establishing a clear policy to do so.”
He said the process, including removing the trees and replanting them, would cost around $30,000.
Mayor Greg Milner said he thought motions like this were a bad idea and short-sighted.
“They tend to be a little bit reactive, a little bit knee-jerk, and quite often for the benefit of a fairly small number of people,” he said.
“In this case, Councillor Coveney tells us that he’s been contacted by over a dozen residents on Jubilee Street.
“I don’t doubt that those dozen Jubilee street residents are genuinely concerned about the preservation of their views and what effect those six trees might have on their views.
“But I do note that we’ve all received correspondence from many, many, many other residents – we’ve even received correspondence from other residents who also live in Jubilee Street – asking us to retain the trees.
“This issue goes well beyond Jubilee Street, we all have a duty to act in the best long-term interests of our community as a whole.”
Milner also expressed concerns over setting a precedent that the council would remove any trees requested by the community.
“If we pass this motion, we will be forced down one of two fairly unpleasant paths. The first path is that we continue to remove trees every time someone asks us to do that.
“Well, I’m sorry I’m not going to support that.
“The second path is that we remove trees for some people, but we don’t remove trees for others, and that’s going to be kind of hard for us to justify in terms of consistent decision-making.
“This, at least to me, is a pretty clear case where, objectively assessed, the interests of the many quite obviously outweigh the interests of the few. I’m voting against this notice of motion.”
Coveney’s motion was then put to a vote, and was carried four votes to three.
A decision on when the trees will be removed, and where replacement greenery will be planted, is yet to be made.
Get alerts on breaking news as it happens. Sign up for our Breaking News Alert.
Read the full article here
